User talk:Mick2

Welcome!

Hello, Mick2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 17:20, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Spiral dynamics

Hello Mick2,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Spiral dynamics for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was previously deleted by a consensus decision.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. GoldenRing (talk) 03:54, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Mick2. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Mick2~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

February 2018

Hello, I'm SkyWarrior. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Anthony Weiner, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. SkyWarrior 20:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to join WikiProject Skepticism

Hi Mick2,

Welcome! You are receiving this message because we've noticed your great edits related to our project WikiProject Skepticism!. We are a group of editors working on improving articles in the scope of this project, and we need your help to meet the project goals. Please come over to our project page to take a look!

You will see a list of articles that need most improvement .
You will find a group of editors who share similar interest with you.
Overall, this is a friendly place to discuss any issues related to Skepticism, ask questions, and collaborate on improving articles on Skepticism!

Feel free to put your name on the project member list. Hope you will have fun here, let us know if you need any help! Bobo.03 (talk) 23:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skepticism

adopt me?

I have come to learn that special interest groups hire students and agents to promote their viewpoint on wikipedia. This might be promoting a firm or a single person, or promoting an entire idea, or slandering the opposition. Combatting this and 'keeping' Wikipedia value-free and fair is very difficult, because when funds are large enough these agents can learn the rules, start Wikilawyering, become Admin, and influence innocent wikipedia editors who are a bit naive and follow the herd. Money can buy a large herd.

I would be happy to learn how to help wikipedia counter these practices. Who will help me? --Mick2 (talk) 12:31, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WE are not a herd. No way. C'ant see paid editors making it though the grueling process of becoming admins:)Charles (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that the wiki community is a herd, Charlesdrakew. I am saying that if one's budget for influencing wikipedia would be hundreds of millions of dollars, it could entertain a lot of editors, and form a corrupt herd inside wikipedia. This herd, speaking in unison or arguing about details but working towards a common goal, could influence genuine editors greatly. That's how I meant it. --Mick2 (talk) 03:57, 15 September 2018 (UTC) ... The most talented of such a huge herd could make it to admin, I have no doubt about that. It's what James Bond would do.[reply]

It hurts me when wikipedia is denounced. I think wikipedia has a lot of quality, and is in fact the highest quality in general. But not all think as I do and I would like to keep improving wikipedia's performance: This was sent to me by a friend, telling me wikipedia is a waste of time (which I do not agree with). --Mick2 (talk) 06:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_nYrlwCdaA
Wikipedia is 'astroturf' (corporate and special interest fake grass roots), from 4'05 minutes and 8'25 minutes.

That is why Wikipedia is not a democracy, so that weight of numbers cannot overpower those who are going with reliable sources.Charles (talk) 09:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be convinced that wikipedia's procedures make it immune to serious manipulation, am I correct? --Mick2 (talk) 19:34, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for someone to adopt me. Will appreciate if you do. Thanks. LtRisen (talk) 12:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption Notice Expired

Hello, I'm Hundsrose. I wanted to let you know that I removed the "seeking adoption" userbox from your user page, because you haven't been active for at least a month. When you come back to Wikipedia, feel free to add the userbox back with the code {{Adopt me}}. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the September 11 attacks. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Acroterion (talk) 03:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And don't use edit summaries like this [1]. Acroterion (talk) 03:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 07:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Alexbrn (talk) 07:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please see http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Luc_Montagnier#February_2023 Talk:Luc_Montagnier#February_2023 Mick2 (talk) 20:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Luc Montagnier

Your recent editing history at Luc Montagnier shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please reconsider. See the edit comment. Mick2 (talk) 20:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Follow WP:BRD and discuss this on the talk page. Never edit war. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:49, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Years-long history of WP:NOTHERE from User:Mick2. Thank you. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). 21:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have lost the way somewhere, and are now at the border of North-Korea. Mick2 (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]